Skip to main content

Cultural Fault Lines

Many people are familiar with geologic faults, such as the San Andreas fault.

A fault line is the where the discontinuity between the two sides of the geographic fault becomes visible as the stresses in the fault causes the two sides to slip past each other.







This fence (located near Point Reyes CA) was separated by the 1906 San Francisco earthquake.

Fault lines also exist within organizations, the Catholic Church and religious congregations are no exception.

In an organization multiple fault lines will exist between the primary and various sub-cultures.  As long as there is sufficient commonality between the two cultures and no pressure (challenging of cultural assumptions) is applied, the difference between the cultures remains hidden beneath the surface. However, once pressure is applied the differences between the two cultures becomes evident as the slip fault in the picture above.

At this point, fault lines are coming to the surface in both the Church as a whole and the Society of St. Pius the Tenth (SSPX) as cultural assumptions are being challenged in both organizations.

In the case of the Catholic Church, both external and internal pressure is being applied apparently with two aims:

  1. To prevent the Pope from regularizing the SSPX without an unconditional acceptance of the teachings of the Second Vatican Council.
  2. That the Church does not deviate from the "world's" interpretation of the documents of the Second Vatican Council.  
If the SSPX were to be regularized without accepting the Second Vatican Council in entirety, it would signal that one can criticize the teachings and evolving liturgy of the Second Vatican Council as the SSPX does, and remain within the Catholic Church. Further it could be interpreted that the theological position of the SSPX concerning the four documents that it holds as contradicting Church Teaching could be correct.

This not an acceptable situation to a number of groups both in and outside the Church. 

In the case of the SSPX, while there is external pressure to accept the Council, internally the possibility of a regularization of the SSPX definitely challenged a number of assumptions held by some of its priests, laity and even one of the four Bishops consecrated by Archbishop Lefebvre.

The exact nature of the 'assumption' remains difficult to discern from the more vocal opponents to the regularization, a regularization that did not occur.  Given the spawning of conspiracy theories that occurred after the June meeting of Bishop Fellay and the Cardinal Levada, when Bishop Fellay was refused to compromise on the principles of the SSPX, I would conclude that there are at least two opinions behind this opposition.

The first opinion is that the Pope is not the Pope, the so-called sedevacantist thesis.  I point this out not because I believe that everyone that who opposes a no-compromise regularization is sedevacantist, but because I have qualitatively noted that some sedevacantists are 'rabid' in their opposition to the Pope and therefore oppose any regularization of the SSPX. 

The second opinion, I believe, is related to a deep distrust of the Pope as well as the hierarchy in general.  There are ample reasons for this distrust and this distrust has been reinforced numerous times over the past 40+ years. 

However, this distrust is not a reliable 'principle' by which one can make decisions. The reason is that distrust is a subjective opinion about the interiour motivations of the person who is the focus of this distrust. 

I believe that the principle of St. Thomas, invoked by Bishop Fellay, is a much better guide in determining when submission is required. When I first read this part of the Summa, I noted that trust has nothing to do with when submission to a superiour is required. This places the principle in the sphere of objective reality.

From an cultural point of view when someone perceives a change in culture or discovers that the organization that they belong to does not actually hold the same cultural assumptions and values, there are three possible outcomes:
  1. Change
  2. Fight
  3. Flight / Leave
The flight, imposed or otherwise from the SSPX of a number of priests and one Bishop has been accomplished. 

Whether or not Bishop Fellay was justified (I believe he was) in these actions is irrelevant from this perspective. The culture of the SSPX is strong and those with equally strong but misaligned cultural assumptions have now left or been expelled. 

From this point of view, the cultural assumptions have been put into bold relief for its members. The culture has been reinforced: when the Pope issues a command or even a simple request that does not go against the Faith, then it requires obedience.  The exact structure of a command that meets the principle of St. Thomas, I trust Bishop Fellay to discern.

Those who are 'misaligned' to such a degree that they fight this cultural assumption, one that I maintain has always been present within the SSPX, will eventually leave or be expelled since it is obvious that they are the ones misaligned and not the SSPX.

P^3
Prayer
Penance
Patience



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

De Veritate - St. Thomas Aquinas - What is necessary to believe explicitly?

I was recently introduced to a work of St. Thomas De Veritate ( Source ) in the course of an argument concerning the minimum content of explicit faith.  When I submitted the following quote as proof: Theological faith, that is, a supernatural faith in Revelation, is necessary, and this is an effect of grace (D 1789); nemini unquam sine ilIa contigit iustificatio (D 1793). As far as the content of this faith is concerned, according to Hebr. 11, 6, at least the existence of God and retribution in the other world must be firmly held, necessitate medii (by the necessity of means) with explicit faith. In regard to the Trinity and the Incarnation, implicit faith suffices. The supernatural faith necessary for justification is attained when God grants to the unbeliever by internal inspiration or external teaching a knowledge of the truths of Revelation, and actual grace to make the supernatural act of faith. Cf. De verite 14, I I.Ott - Fundamentals of Dogma p241 In response my opponent ...

Comparision of the Tridentine, Cranmer and Novus Ordo Masses

+ JMJ I downloaded the comparison that was linked in the previous article on the mass (here) . ... a very good reference! P^3 From: Whispers of Restoration (available at this link) . CHARTING LITURGICAL CHANGE Comparing the 1962 Ordinary of the Roman Mass to changes made during the Anglican Schism; Compared in turn to changes adopted in the creation of Pope Paul VI’s Mass in 1969 The chart on the reverse is a concise comparison of certain ritual differences between three historical rites for the celebration of the Catholic Mass Vetus Ordo: “Old Order,” the Roman Rite of Mass as contained in the 1962 Missal, often referred to as the “Traditional Latin Mass.”The Ordinary of this Mass is that of Pope St. Pius V (1570) following the Council of Trent (1545-63), hence the occasional moniker “Tridentine Mass.” However, Trent only consolidated and codified the Roman Rite already in use at that time; its essential form dates to Pope St. Gregory the Great (+604), in whose time the R...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5b - How Did We Get Here??? ... A Continued Anlaysis using ChatGPT.

 + JMJ Part 5b How Did We Get Here??? So in the previous ChatGPT analysis the LLM ‘concluded’ that there was continuity in doctrine. So now we’re going to explore this element. There is some repetition but I don't have time right now to do a lot of editing.  I think instead we'll have a Part 5c where I try to pull it all together with some old fashioned human sense making. At the end point, I think the LLM collects an interesting if somewhat skewed perspective: The SSPX mapping hinges on this claim: That Vatican II affirms (at least implicitly) propositions that the Syllabus of Errors explicitly condemned. The broader Church response is: The same propositions are still rejected—but Vatican II is addressing different categories (political, pastoral, anthropological) rather than reversing doctrine. While the summary of the SSPX position seems close, that of the broader Church seems to be either an outright AI hallucination or a consensus point from the literature that it used...

News Roundup: April 30, 2026

 + JMJ I just realised that I haven't posted the latest Roundup ... and there is a lot in the roundup as the media storm around the SSPX continues! I also just noticed this article: European Conservative: Why the SSPX Bishop Decision Matters Far Beyond Church Politics (link) .  P^3 === Popes Past Present and Future Papal News and Views Cardinal Fernandez maintains that Francis is not dead- metaphorically Pope Leo XIV Reopens Amoris Laetitia File | FSSPX News Pope Leo: “We Do Not Agree with the Formalized Blessing of …Homosexual Couples” - OnePeterFive RORATE CÆLI: How Pope Leo is Reshuffling the Curia: Musical Chairs and Power Games RORATE CÆLI: A Giant Leap: The meaning of Cardinal Eijk’s Pontifical High Mass and the Rebirth of Dutch Catholicism RORATE CÆLI: A Sign of Continuity with the Pre-Francis Papacy: Pope to Wash Feet of Twelve Priests RORATE CÆLI: Vatican Blocks Continuity of Procedure of Beatification and Canonization of Argentine Bishop -- no new Satanellis Pope Leo...

Rome and the SSPX - Version 2026 Part 5 - How Did We Get Here???

 + JMJ This is the fifth in this series and I think it may require a part b to show the controversial documents and teachings of the Pope post V2. P^3 Part 5 How Did We Get Here??? Introduction My family became ‘Traditional’ in early 1980’s and I didn’t realise until years later how early we entered the Fray. So the SSPX was slightly over a decade old when we started going to Mass. That is a young organization, as someone said at the consecrations “Aren’t you a little young to be a bishop?”, the response was, “That is something that time will change.” 1970: SSPX founded with diocesan approval (Abp. Marcel Lefebvre) 1974–1976: Vatican II disputes escalate; Lefebvre suspended a divinis 1988: Illicit episcopal consecrations → excommunications declared 2000: SSPX Jubilee pilgrimage to Rome (signals openness to talks) 2009: Excommunications lifted by Pope Benedict XVI 2011–2012: Doctrinal talks with CDF collapse 2015–2017: SSPX granted faculties for confessi...